OldBrownsFan Posted September 15, 2018 Report Share Posted September 15, 2018 "The Michigan GOP has decided to try and make sure that the winner of the 2016 election in the state, Donald Trump, could never duplicate that feat again by supporting the National Popular Vote Initiative. What is the National Popular Vote Initiative? Sounds harmless right? According to the website it simply wants to… The National Popular Vote bill would guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Actually, it shreds the United States Consitution. You know the document that all these elected officials swore to uphold at one point. The framers knew that the original 13 colonies were going to expand at one point. They also wanted to make sure that smaller states like Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island would have a say in the national election for President. The electoral college helps to make that a possibility. If we elected people purely on the result of a national vote than New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and California would be the only states you would need to campaign in. So how does this effect a state like Michigan? In the Presidential election of 2016 when Donald Trump faced off against Hillary Clinton, she won the popular vote according to 270 to win Clinton 65,845,063 Trump 62,980,160 Difference 2,864,903 Yet Trump won the electoral vote 304 to 227. This meant that Michigan, Iowa, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were in play for the first time in decades. Had we just gone with the popular vote than the vote totals in California would have sealed the deal for Hillary. Califonia totals were according to politico Clinton 7,362,490 Trump 3,916,209 Difference 3,446,281 Califonia alone would have decided the election and all those states in the south and midwest would be set aside for the states on the coast with the most population. The electoral college made both candidates focus on the issues that are facing Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa which are much different than California. So why in the world would the Michigan GOP be lining up for something that would have ensured that Donald Trump would not be President? Well, a free trip to Hawaii wouldn’t hurt. According to the Detroit Free Press… A group backing a major change in the way the president is elected took a large group of Michigan Republican lawmakers on a free trip to Hawaii in August. Among those who took the trip was state Rep. Tim Kelly, R-Saginaw Township, the primary sponsor of a “National Popular Vote” bill introduced in the House on Sept. 5. A lobbyist pushing for passage of the bill, under which Michigan would join a compact of states wanting to elect the president based on the national popular vote, while keeping the Electoral College, said Monday the three-day trip after the Aug. 7 primary involved “hard work,” not “wining and dining.” “It is tong and hammer,” Lansing lobbyist Frank Venuto said of the Hawaii trip paid for by the Institute for Research on Presidential Elections — a California-based charity affiliated with the National Popular Vote group, for which Venuto lobbies. I love this part… Institute for Research on Presidential Elections — a California-based charity I’m sure that is just coincidence. California based research center trying to influence the popular vote application by sending legislators to Hawaii. Not a push for votes at all. Still, why in the world would a bunch of REPUBLICANS be doing this? Under this very proposal, they are preventing Geroge W. Bush from becoming president in 2000. Donald Trump barely won Michigan by 10k votes but we would have been forced by Michigan law aligned with this pact to commit our electoral votes to Hillary so we could appease California or New York. Nice way to do a end around both the U.S. and Michigan constitutions and to send a screw you to your voters. Thankfully not everyone in Michigan with an R after their name has lost their minds. State Sen. Patrick Colbeck R-Canton Township in a rebuttal letter to a Detroit News editorial in part wrote this… In the 2016 presidential election, Michigan turned red for the first time since 1988 and voted to allocate all 16 of our electors to President Trump. Hillary Clinton would have gained these electors if National Popular Vote were the law of the land. In this light, could support for this initiative be a referendum against President Trump? In short, I don’t believe so, but it is likely a referendum against the free-thinking citizens who put Trump into office. Hopefully, there are more people like State Sen. Patrick Colbeck and less like the Republicans who took a free trip to Hawaii, that will kill this bill, not only in Michigan but across the country. We don’t need our national elections decided by those who are heavily taxed and looking to grab the rest of the countries resources for the masses on the coasts. Stop trying to shred the Consitution. And pay for your own trips to Hawaii. https://www.redstate.com/tladuke/2018/09/14/michigan-gop-plans-shredding-constitution-trump-national-popular-vote/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 15, 2018 Report Share Posted September 15, 2018 yes and another issue on Sessions backlogged desk - VOTER FRAUD!!! the popular vote difference that higgardly gained - ALL PHONY VOTES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted September 15, 2018 Author Report Share Posted September 15, 2018 Just now, FairHooker11 said: yes and another issue on Sessions backlogged desk - VOTER FRAUD!!! the popular vote difference that higgardly gained - ALL PHONY VOTES I have about zero confidence in Jeff Sessions. Not firing Comey on day 1 and wanting Sessions as his AG are two of Trump's worst mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 15, 2018 Report Share Posted September 15, 2018 Sessions is terrified of the deep state - and rosenstein is one of the powerful ones. He needs to go, or better yet, fire rosenstein and replace him. The mueller investigation is going to go on for years to keep Trump from firing any more deep staters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted September 15, 2018 Report Share Posted September 15, 2018 10 hours ago, FairHooker11 said: yes and another issue on Sessions backlogged desk - VOTER FRAUD!!! the popular vote difference that higgardly gained - ALL PHONY VOTES All more conspiracy bs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 2 hours ago, TexasAg1969 said: All more conspiracy bs. They don't care. None of them care. Facts don't matter any more. Just emotion. If a statement feels right, you agree with it, then it is true. That's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 I also love how any attempt to change anything in the Constitution (which gives us a means to change it and has been changed multiple times) is seen as "shredding" the Constitution. "Attack!" "Destroy!" "Obliterate!" the Constitution. Smh. The type of thinking championed by those that don't like to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 That's ok Woody. An Ohio State Alum Billionaire just quit the Republican party this week because of Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 10 hours ago, MLD Woody said: They don't care. None of them care. Facts don't matter any more. Just emotion. If a statement feels right, you agree with it, then it is true. That's it. yea facts are so inconvenient especially when you are countering emotionally. 😭 https://nypost.com/2016/12/14/michigan-recount-reveals-error-but-not-the-one-jill-stein-wanted/ Now it’s Republican leaders who are demanding an investigation to determine why a third of the city’s voting machines registered more ballots than actual voters, the Detroit News reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 you can do this all day long! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 10 hours ago, MLD Woody said: I also love how any attempt to change anything in the Constitution (which gives us a means to change it and has been changed multiple times) is seen as "shredding" the Constitution. "Attack!" "Destroy!" "Obliterate!" the Constitution. Smh. The type of thinking championed by those that don't like to think. changing the electoral count to a popular count is "shredding" the reason it was put in there... gee weve been through this a million times before. its only because the leftys are gearing up for their "perceived" election wins this time and putting it on the table for its "perceived" quick passage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 16, 2018 Report Share Posted September 16, 2018 to which OBF Cal me and others say loudly = SESSIONS - where are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted September 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2018 On 9/16/2018 at 8:15 AM, FairHooker11 said: changing the electoral count to a popular count is "shredding" the reason it was put in there... gee weve been through this a million times before. its only because the leftys are gearing up for their "perceived" election wins this time and putting it on the table for its "perceived" quick passage There was a reason the founders of the country wanted the electoral college and set up a republic over a pure democracy in our country. They did not want to see concentrated power any where but set up checks and balances to prevent it from happening. Without the electoral college we would have just a few states who would determine elections and the founders did not want that. They wanted all the states to have a voice at the table. There is a reason that the tiny state of Rhode Island has the same two senators that huge California has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 18, 2018 Report Share Posted September 18, 2018 1 minute ago, OldBrownsFan said: There was a reason the founders of the country wanted the electoral college and set up a republic over a pure democracy in our country. They did not want to see concentrated power any where but set up checks and balances to prevent it from happening. Without the electoral college we would have just a few states who would determine elections and the founders did not want that. They wanted all the states to have a voice at the table. There is a reason that the tiny state of Rhode Island has the same two senators that huge California has. Yes, there is a reason why the Senate is setup like that. Of course, we're not talking about the Senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted September 18, 2018 Author Report Share Posted September 18, 2018 14 minutes ago, MLD Woody said: Yes, there is a reason why the Senate is setup like that. Of course, we're not talking about the Senate. Part of the same reason the founders of the country did not want to set up a pure democracy and set up a republic instead: "The founders did not opt for direct election of presidents because they opposed direct democracy and supported representative government. But there was another reason as well. The U.S. was a coalition of sovereign states. That’s why it is called the United States. Each state is required to have a republican government, but the U.S. is not a direct compact with the people. “We the people” are the foundation of the Republic, but the states are the legal foundation. The states wanted to be assured that one state would not override the interests of the others and no state would be completely excluded. Thus, each state was given two senators, regardless of size, so that in one house of Congress all states were equally powerful. You might charge that this is undemocratic. It is. It was intended to be. The founders did not create a direct democracy for a good reason. It would have prevented the U.S. from emerging as a stable union. They created a republican form of government based on representation and a federal system based on sovereign states. Because of that, a candidate who ignores or insults the “flyover” states is likely to be writing memoirs instead of governing." Maybe Hillary Clinton should haven't ignored campaigning in Wisconsin? https://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-friedman/the-founding-fathers-never-meant-to-create_b_13051196.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.